Feral Jundi

Sunday, January 20, 2019

Industry Talk: General Tata And Erik Prince On A Plan For Syria

Filed under: Industry Talk,Syria — Tags: , , , — Matt @ 5:25 PM

This a great post for the new year. Basically Erik Prince, with the help of a former Brigadier General Tata, are applying the model of the Prince Plan to Syria. The administration wants to pull the troops out of Syria, and this private plan is a way to continue providing assistance to those that are still in the fight without committing troops there.

What is unique here is that this Syria operation would be a test for what Erik wants to do in Afghanistan. It should be noted that the administration has also called for a significant troop reduction in Afghanistan as well. Could Syria become the test ground for such a plan? Tata and Prince think so, and this is their appeal to the President.

So how what does the political environment look like for these plans? At this time, all the impediments to the original Prince Plan are gone. Secretary of Defense Mattis is gone, HR McMaster is gone, and John Kelly is gone. So at this time, there really isn’t a strong opposition group to influence the President to go one way or the other. Prince was quoted that HR McMaster was very much opposed to the Prince Plan. With all of these folks gone and replaced, I think things are favorable to at least considering these options.

Further, the ideology of Mick Mulvaney, who is the acting White House Chief of Staff has libertarian leanings. He was involved with Senator Rand Paul’s campaign for President, and Rand leans libertarian. Guess who else leans libertarian? Erik Prince.

The two things that popped out that were interesting here, was the reference to the Flying Tigers, and an identification of his proposed force structure. He mentioned some key acronyms of the plan that would be used for both Syria and later in Afghanistan.

Other threats, though, loom on the horizon, and the United States can husband its military forces, reduce operational costs, and prepare for future combat by employing private Military Mentor Teams (MMT), Aviation Support Units (ASU), and Governance Support Elements (GSE). We can do this first in Syria with an economy of force and then review the lessons learned as we transition into Afghanistan.

Another deal to mention is that Erik was seen in two interviews of interest, one with CNN and the other Fox. In both of these interviews he was asked about Syria and a private option. Yet again, the Flying Tigers were mentioned as an example of the United States using private forces to implement policy overseas.

What is curious here is that if these forces deployed to Syria, we might actually see a situation where a PMSC is in position to fight a PMSC. Something I have speculated about over the years, but really haven’t seen an example of in modern warfare. PMC Wagner is a Russian PMSC that is currently in Syria, and the US forces in Syria have clashed with this company before. So it is not totally impossible for a situation like PMSC vs PMSC to happen. 

We will see how it goes. –Matt

 

Tata & Prince: Precedent for Syria, Afghanistan pullout lies with WWII-era Flying Tigers
January 19, 2019
By Erik Prince and Brigadier Gen. Anthony J. Tata
President Trump is right to continue his drive to remove combat troops from Syria and Afghanistan and can cite the success of the privatized Flying Tigers in World War II as a way of finding economy of force during transition operations.

U.S. troops have been carrying the lion’s share of these fights and have mostly accomplished the original missions of each. In Syria, ISIS is largely defeated, save rogue terrorists that will continue to attempt asymmetric attacks. In Afghanistan, Coalition forces have trained and equipped 175,000 Afghan National Army and 150,000 Afghan National Police Forces that can secure their country.

To be sure, we maintain strategic interests in each of the regions. In Syria, we need to deny an Iranian land bridge to Israel and the Mediterranean Sea. In Afghanistan we need to ensure the Afghan government can deny sanctuary to terrorist groups such as Al Qaeda to prevent planning of attacks against the homeland.

Other threats, though, loom on the horizon, and the United States can husband its military forces, reduce operational costs, and prepare for future combat by employing private Military Mentor Teams (MMT), Aviation Support Units (ASU), and Governance Support Elements (GSE). We can do this first in Syria with an economy of force and then review the lessons learned as we transition into Afghanistan.

The private force will be almost entirely former military and law enforcement from multiple countries. Veterans serving again ensures experienced combat-seasoned personnel will be coaching, teaching, and mentoring indigenous forces. The historical case study for this common-sense, cost-saving action that bolsters our alliances and ensures achievement of our enduring strategic interests is the Flying Tigers in the pre-World War II era.

The Flying Tigers were privatized pilots from the U.S. Army Air Corps, Navy, and Marine Corps. President Franklin D. Roosevelt authorized their establishment and mission to protect the Chinese against Japanese aggression in 1941. After training in Burma, the Flying Tigers saw combat against Japan less than two weeks after the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. Its members were paid double or triple the salary of their military counterparts and they achieved mission success. Official records show they destroyed nearly 300 Japanese aircraft. They were disbanded in July 1942 when the 23rd Fighter Group assumed much of their equipment and mission.

The Flying Tiger example is one where a private force was well-positioned before conflict, setting the conditions for transition into conflict for the U.S. Air Force. Instead of on the front end of conflict, today’s need in Syria and Afghanistan is on the back end, to facilitate U.S. withdrawal and maintenance of hard-fought gains by Coalition Forces.

The real opportunity now is to transition in Syria first and learn from that experience before committing to a transition plan in Afghanistan. The move makes sense in every respect. The U.S. has invested nearly $1 trillion in Afghanistan since the war’s inception and has another $50 billion on tap for 2019. The privatized force can do the job about 85 percent cheaper with the prospect of being more effective. The Military Mentor Teams, Aviation Support Units, and Governance Support Elements are scaled and embedded with the indigenous forces for the duration of the fight, not rotating every six to 12 months. The need on the ground in both Syria and Afghanistan is for continued foreign internal defense, which only our special forces units can provide. The U.S. military doesn’t have enough special forces units to be everywhere they are needed.

History supports presidential authorization for the use of private military contractors during transition operations to help the U.S. and its allies achieve strategic aims. Now is the time to begin the transition, secure our vital interests, and husband our precious resources.

Retired US Army Brigadier Gen. Anthony J. Tata, Brigadier General, was the deputy commanding general of U.S. forces in Afghanistan from 2006-07

Erik Prince is CEO of Frontier Resource Group

Story here.

Wednesday, December 12, 2018

Industry Talk: A Symposium On PMSC Influence On International Security And Foreign Policy Part 1

Filed under: Industry Talk,South Africa — Tags: , , , , , , , — Matt @ 2:47 PM

Last month a pretty unique deal went down in Georgia that I definitely wanted to get on the blog. This was a symposium on all things PMSC, which is awesome. What made it even more unique was the inclusion of so many big names in this industry, along with some familiar academics and authors. So the industry was well represented in this deal, and it is worth talking about here.

My posts on the event will coincide with the youtube videos they put out. There were three of them, so this will be a three part series.

For initial impressions, the South African industry was well represented in this event. Matter of fact, 13 countries were represented in this Symposium and all topics and companies related to this industry were covered, and not just western ones. It was refreshing to see that kind of focus, because there is an entire world of contracting out there that does not get the same attention that western companies do.

So let’s get started. Dr. Edward Mienie and others were fantastic in putting this together and reaching out to the various players in this industry. He was able to get such names as Eeben Barlow, Erik Prince, Dr. Sean McFate, Johan Raath, and Dr. Molly Dunnigan. The other panelists were also interesting to listen to because of the amount of work they have contributed to their specific topics. These were legal experts, academics, cyber experts, etc. all who had some speciality and topic that related to this industry and current events.

For part 1, here are the list of panelists in this video and where in the video they begin to talk.

 

16:41 –      Event Starts

25:17 –      Dr. Billy Wells

30:13 –     Mr. Eeben Barlow

1:32:17 –   Panel Introduction

1:36:22 –  Dr. Molly Dunigan

1:50:08 –  Mr. Johan Raath

2:06:26 –  Dr. Abel Esterhuyse

2:20:02 –  Dr. Kiril Avramov

2:35:03 –   Panel Discussion: Influences on Foreign Policy

3:06:40 –  Dr. Edward Mienie

 

I do not want to go into great detail on each, because I would much rather the reader watch and ponder. But I will bring up some stuff that I thought was interesting for each individual or the panel.

First up is Eeben, and he did his portion on what STTEP did in Nigeria. I have written about that in the past, and he goes into further detail about the contract. The amount of detail was excellent and I imagine a book will come out about it at some point. He does discuss a little of what they did in Nigeria in his Composite Warfare book, but looking at all the details presented about Operation Anvil, it requires it’s own treatment.

The big idea here is that STTEP trained the Nigerian forces for 2 months, and fought ‘with’ the Nigerians for one month, and were able to take back territory from Boko Haram the size of Belgium. But this was a train and mentor game, with an emphasis on mentoring. Eeben emphasized building trust with his Nigerian clients, and what that required. To experience the same hardships and accommodations and food and be prepared to work with minimal equipment. To ‘Leave as friends that will be missed’. Excellent stuff and why the west is not telling Nigeria to continue this contract with STTEP so that BH can be destroyed is beyond me.

Definitely check out the slides the Eeben put together and he put up a lessons learned deal as well. What they encountered in Nigeria has lessons for any military or private company wanting to do the same.

 

Eeben Barlow Slide on Lessons Learned in Nigeria.

 

For some cool tidbits, he was asked a question from the audience about BH’s weaknesses. He said that they do not understand the principle of the defense–or that they break contact and run under pressure.

He was also asked about equipment and it was pretty sparse and crappy from the sounds of it. They were constantly running out of 12.7 mm ammo, and Nigerian logistics were lacking. He was also asked if companies like STTEP are quick fixes or lasting? His reply is that a PMSC can create the conditions, but the end result is up to the government.

For more on Eeben’s portion of this Symposium, take it over to Facebook and read his posts about his part. Very interesting discussion and lots of commentary and support from his readers.

 

 

The Panel Discussion included Dr. Molly Dunnigan, Johan Raath, Dr. Abel Esterhaus, and Dr. Kiril Avramov. Molly discussed RAND‘s work on contractors and discussed privatizing the Afghan war. (a nod to Erik Prince and the Prince Plan).

The Prince Plan seemed to be a theme that everyone wanted to talk about or reference. What Erik is proposing is pretty radical, and it was smart for folks to dig into the what ifs. Molly took the position of bringing up reasons against it I guess. Or just bringing up some of the issues that have come up over the years. Some of that stuff she got right, but other stuff was off.

Luckily Johan Raath was there to give some counter to Molly’s position. He was representing the guy on the ground. Johan is South African and contracted in Iraq and served in the military in SA. He also has a book out called Blood Money, which is about his experiences as a contractor in Iraq.

One point that he brought up was that his company in Iraq was the first to use aircraft. They had to get engineers into Ramadi, and could not do ground movements because of all of the combat operations going on. I am sure his book details more of that, and that was some cool history. He also mentioned that 38 South Africans were killed in Iraq. I worked with one of the guys on that list, and it was a reminder to the audience of the South African contribution and sacrifice in these wars.

 

Next up on the panel was Dr. Abel Esterhaus, another South African who talked about the PMSC industry in that country. He also talked about how much the economy in SA is dependent on private security because the crime is so bad there. But he also made a key point about SA’s private military aspect. That SA PMSC’s have a successful track record of fighting wars, with a mention of Angola, Sierra Leone, and Nigeria. Of course this is a nod to Eeben’s STTEP and EO.

The final panelist in this discussion was Dr. Kiril Avramov. His focus was on Russian PMSC’s, and specifically how Russian companies are used to fortify or advance political, economic, and military interests. That Russia is experimenting and using private forces like PMC Wagner as part of a Hybrid Warfare strategy.

Probably of interest here is the idea that Russia did not use conventional forces to invade Ukraine and take territory. They used proxy forces, which included private companies like PMC Wagner to operate in that grey zone long enough until they achieved an objective.

Some interesting stuff brought up was Article 359, which prohibits mercenary activities, and the effort to legalize these companies. He also talked about the phases of Russian experimentation with PMSCs’s, starting with the Ukraine, then the Slavonic Corps experience in Syria and their failure, and then on to PMC Wagner and their work.

He actually listed their offense in Palmyra in 2016 as a success. Very interesting, and you could file that under another successful use of a PMSC for offensive operations. Of course in Syria, PMC Wagner has had some failures and clashes with western forces. But the big one is the future of groups like PMC Wagner, and that future is Africa. Libya, CAR, Sudan, etc. are all places that PMC Wagner is working, and I am sure more will follow. The point of his talk is that Russian PMSC’s are not going away, and they are evolving.

One factoid that came up is that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu went to Moscow six times to help deconflict between Israeli forces and the forces of PMC Wagner. Dr. Daniel Papp mentioned that one and that gives you an idea of how complex the battlefield is in Syria. February of this year, PMC Wagner got into a fight with US forces and it did not go well for them. We have absolutely been focused on deconfliction in Syria between all parties, and private forces cannot be excluded in that battle space.

The panel finished up with some questions. One question that was asked was if the Military and PMSCs do fellowships? Like the military actually sending someone to a company. I thought it was an intriguing thought, and I do not know of any company out there that does this. Nor did any of the panelists know of such a thing.

What does happen though is that guys who are National Guardsmen or Reservists contract with the companies. But that is on an individual basis, and there is no official exchange program that I am aware of. Would the military benefit from sending someone to DynCorp? Maybe, and it is worth exploring.

The final speaker was Dr. Eddie Mienie and went into detail about South Africa’s security situation. That SA is a fragile state and that the increased use of PMSC’s there are a sign of latent state fragility.

One thing of note when he spoke is that Erik Prince was in the audience in the front row, and asked him a question about the white farmer murders going on that country.

To me, that was the neat part about this symposium. It was not just a bunch of academics but a mix of folks, and both sides of the arguments were well represented. In other words, there was balance. The next post will be Part 2 of this Symposium, with Erik Prince presenting his plan for Afghanistan and some great commentary from panelists about the pros and cons of such a thing. –Matt

 

Wednesday, July 11, 2018

Industry Talk: A Better Solution For Afghanistan, By Erik Prince

Filed under: Afghanistan,Industry Talk — Tags: , , , , — Matt @ 1:22 PM

So here it is. I blogged about a hint of Erik Prince starting up a campaign to sell his plan for Afghanistan, and this is the start. For this go around, he set up three videos to sell the idea. One of them is in Dari and I will post a few of the videos below. Both of them have detailed some of the same things mentioned last time Erik rolled out his plan.

Of course for that last roll out, the Prince Plan was squashed because President Trump was surrounded by military folks. Specifically, Prince mentioned exactly who shot down the plan last time in this Independent interview.

Speaking of its strongest critic, the then national security advisor, Mr Prince said: “McMaster was a three star [general] who wanted to be a four star, and simply would not accept anything like this which was not conventional.
“I heard President Trump read about my plans in the Oval Office and told McMaster that he preferred it to his plans, so perhaps I got off on the wrong foot with McMaster.
“But McMaster was at the time proposing sending 70,000 extra troops to Afghanistan, so obviously he would not have liked what I was suggesting.”

I also found a piece that Erik wrote today over at Real Clear Politics. What I thought was unique was the mention of President Trump’s Wollman Ice Rink deal. If folks remember, that is where the President when he was a private citizen, took over a project that was taking way too long and cost way too much money in New York. In this example, Prince was appealing to that part of President Trump’s thought process about accomplishing tasks that government fails at.

This is a Wollman Ice Rink moment for the president, who rightly campaigned on a pledge to end America’s endless wars—especially its longest in history. An approach like this is the only way he can do so responsibly, legally and cost-effectively, while saving the lives of America’s service personnel and hundreds of billions of dollars.

I challenge the inevitable naysayers to offer a better solution.

This is a fascinating aspect of this whole deal. To sell a concept like this to a President whom has surrounded himself with the top military leaders of the country. Although it is not a new thing in the course of US history. I have been reading the book The Flying Tigers by Daniel Ford and it is fantastic. In that book, Ford details the effort of selling the idea of a private air force in China to President Roosevelt. Of course there was risk in that as well, but the President accepted that risk and gave the wink to the operation. The Flying Tigers were immensely successful and the rest is history. But that venture still needed the ‘ok’ by the President and Erik Prince is definitely writing this stuff to appeal to the Commander in Chief.

I would also say there is new leadership surrounding President Trump, that might be a little more receptive to what Erik is talking about. Which is probably why Erik is putting all of this together in the first place. We will see how it all goes and I am sure we will see more in the news about it. Especially as the Taliban continue to take more territory in Afghanistan and the strategy there gains more scrutiny. –Matt

 

Saturday, November 25, 2017

Cool Stuff: John Stossel Discusses The Good Of Private Military Companies

Filed under: Cool Stuff,Industry Talk,Letter Of Marque — Tags: , , , , , , , — Matt @ 11:14 AM

This is an excellent little piece by John Stossel. He is a Libertarian and brings forth some interesting points of view in regards to private industry vs government. He has a book that delves further into his ideas.

Some of the examples brought up in this video, would be familiar to anyone that has read this blog. They talked about the Flying Tigers, Somali Pirates and the MARSEC response (with mention of The Somali Project), privateering and the Letter of Marque, as well as early American colonists and their use of private security.

I would have also added some more uses of contractors that had positive results. Executive Outcomes in Angola and Sierra Leone, STTEP in Nigeria, and David Stirling’s PMSC that fought in Yemen to name a few.

It is great to finally see some alternative points of view when talking about this industry and I recommend watching this. –Matt

 

The Flying Tigers.

 

Friday, August 4, 2017

Legal News: Erik Prince Statement On Raven23 Court Of Appeals Ruling

Filed under: Iraq,Legal News — Tags: , , , , , , — Matt @ 4:05 PM

     I am heartened by the Court of Appeals ruling today and am grateful the Court finally recognized the unique nature of a Blackwater Contractor’s relationship with the federal government. These men volunteered to serve their country in deadly environments not once, but twice. Each of them served in the Armed Forces, then volunteered to serve again as contracted security professionals. They served our nation with distinction and have always deserved better treatment. At trial, the US Attorney steadfastly maintained that our men initiated the firefight in Nisour Square without provocation. I was shocked when the US Attorney finally admitted, on the record, that was not the case. I hope the attorneys who appear to have deliberately misrepresented the evidence before the trial court face investigation and appropriate disciplinary action. -Erik Prince

Folks, this is hopeful news and that statement up top is an exclusive statement from Erik Prince for the Feral Jundi readership. I also posted a statement below from the Free Raven23 Facebook Page below. That page is managed by the friends and family of these men. Below that, I was also able to get a statement from Christin Caveness Slough.

My own commentary on this is that this whole deal has been incredibly political and these men have suffered because of that. This is also significant to the discourse out there, because every article or book or commentary that references the Nisour Square incident, will now have to include this history. That is if they care about the truth, or telling the whole story. –Matt

PLEASE READ ALL AND SHARE!

We received a decision today. It is not true justice, but it is a SMALL step closer to reuniting our families. But we have a LONG road to go and humbly ask for your prayers.
Nick’s conviction was overturned (because his jury did not hear evidence of his innocence), but the government has the ability to retry him. We don’t yet know if that will happen, how long it will take to decide, or what will happen to Nick during the interim (kept in custody or released).
One of Evan’s convictions was overturned.
He, Paul, and Dustin will be re-sentenced due to the misapplication of the federal weapons law to secure their 30-year mandatory minimum sentences. We don’t yet know when their resentencing will be held.
We need prayer warriors more than ever:
(1) release and no retrial for Nick; and (2) time served at re-sentencing for Dustin, Evan, and Paul SOON. 

Free Raven 23 website here.
Free Raven 23 Facebook Page here.

Christin Cavness Slough statement.

While I am thrilled that Nick Slatten’s completely erroneous conviction has been vacated, the remaining convictions being upheld is why I no longer trust, or respect, our federal judicial system. There was an opportunity here for the court to finally show that it could deliver justice within the clearly framed boundaries of the law and failed to even issue a coherent or unified opinion. It is an additional small victory that the court finally recognizes that the federal weapons law, used to force 30 year mandatory minimum sentences, was woefully misapplied however calling it a tragedy that it was applied in the first place would be a gross understatement. We remain hopeful that all four of these men will be home where they belong sooner rather than later, but this was not the firm step in that direction that we had hoped or that the law required.

Ex-Blackwater contractor gets murder conviction tossed by federal appeals court
August 04, 2017

A federal appeals court Friday overturned a former Blackwater security contractor’s first-degree murder conviction in connection with a 2007 shooting in Baghdad that killed 14 Iraqi civilians and injured 17 others.
In a split decision, the three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals of the District of Columbia Circuit ruled a lower court erred by not allowing Nicholas Slatten to be tried separately from his three co-defendants in 2014.
Slatten, 33, had been sentenced to life in prison for his role in the shooting, in which prosecutors claimed he had fired the first shots.
The court also ordered new sentences for the three other contractors — Paul Slough, Evan Liberty and Dustin Herd — who were each found guilty of manslaughter and firearms charges carrying mandatory 30-year terms.
The judges determined those sentences were “grossly disproportionate to their culpability for using government-issued weapons in a war-zone.” Prosecutors had charged the men with using military firearms while committing another felony. That statute, typically employed against gang members or bank robbers, had never before been used against overseas security contractors working for the U.S. government.

(more…)

Older Posts »

Powered by WordPress